TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 1215
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he respondent's account, the petitioner is before this Court. 2. The petitioner's case is that he is a Non-Resident Indian having an NRE account in the Indian Bank and ICICI Bank. That apart, he has savings bank account with the ICICI Bank. The petitioner holds a Permanent Account No.AFRPA3435M as a Non-Resident Indian. He is running a hotel in Malaysia and in India, he is the authorized dealer of Bharath Petroleum. 3. The petitioner would submit that he has been holding the NRE account from the assessment year 2011-2012 onwards and he has been regularly and diligently reporting the income in his returns under the following heads from the year 2011-2012 onwards. a) net profit from the petrol bunk business; and b) interest from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd 23.11.2020. These notices were issued when the COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak. Therefore, the petitioner was not in a position to reply the said notices. Thereafter, he had received a notice dated 07.01.2021 stating that there was an introduction of a huge capital amounting to Rs.7,73,84,755/- for the year under consideration. 6. On 08.02.2021, the petitioner had issued a reply stating that he is a Non- Resident Indian and also an authorized dealer of Bharat Petroleum having a total turn over of Rs.8,37,00,000/-. That apart, he was also running a hotel in Malaysia. The petitioner had enclosed all the relevant documents for the scrutiny of the respondent. Despite producing the details and proof as also the explanation, the respondent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Notice Nos.ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)-1/2022-23/1047552749(1) dated 22.11.2022, ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)-1/2022-23/1047556796(1) dated 22.11.2022 and ITBA/RCV/S/226(3)-1/2022-23/1047551301(1) dated 22.11.2022. 10. The petitioner had challenged the said demand by filing writ petitions in W.P.(MD) Nos.27059 to 27062 of 2022. By an order dated 13.10.2022, this Court had allowed the said writ petitions thereby quashing the demand order dated 13.10.2022 and directed the respondent to reconsider and pass speaking orders. The writ petitions challenging the attachment orders in W.P.(MD) Nos.27059 to 27062 of 2022 were also taken up on the very same day and it was held that the attachment orders wold be vacated, if no order is passed regarding the demand on or be....